Will Bitcoin become a state-backed global currency? As a reference of value for national fiat currencies. A mandatory one-world currency is statist monolith that can only be supported by war, coercion, and violence. It means one-world authority, one-world governance system. Bitcoin is a global currency, it is the de facto currency of the internet, but it doesn't represent a zero-sum game; it's a choice you have in addition to all the other alternatives that may be prohibited, that doesn't need to force anyone to use it.
It is an antiquated notion that a currency needs to be imposed on a border basis or an aggregation of states. As if the euro wasn't already bad enough, it would be a complete fascist dystopia if the EU replaced the euro with "a digital currency like bitcoin," because it is meaningless for a country to choose to use Bitcoin and they would not implement it unless it was a centralised nightmare of surveillance.
Transcript
[AUDIENCE] Just recently, we were discussing a lot about currencies and [the idea of] one global currency. One [person was of] the opinion that bitcoin might become a global currency, where other fiat currencies are seeing it as a reference of value. What is your take on that? Would [Bitcoin] ever [get to that point of] replacing the dollar, and have bitcoin as the global currency that everybody is referring to [as a unit of account]?
[ANDREAS] I think that world view, of a competition in which one currency "wins" and becomes a de-facto standard to the exclusion of all others, is the model that can only be supported by war. It's a model that can only be supported by [a monopoly by] coercion and violence. It is fundamentally a statist perspective, of a zero-sum game in which you only win if you crush the opponent. Bitcoin doesn't represent a zero-sum game.
It represents a choice that you have in addition to everything that already exists. It doesn't need to displace, replace, or force anyone to use it. I think a [future] by which Bitcoin becomes a mandatory system... I was asked by a journalists once: "Do you think the eurozone could adopt digital currency like bitcoin, or something like it, to replace the euro?" I said, "That's a complete fascist dystopia.
As if the euro itself wasn't already bad enough!" [Laughter] [Applause] "One world currency" means one world authority, governance system, and culture. It's as likely as one world religion, one world language, one world culture. We are not a 'one world' in that sense. We are many.
To me, Bitcoin represents the choice to use alternatives... where it would otherwise be prohibited to create or use alternatives. Bitcoin is a global currency. Bitcoin is the de-facto currency of the internet today.
Bitcoin is the most successful open, borderless currency that has ever existed. It is already a reference of value for many of the people in this room. It is my income and has been for the last three years, almost exclusively. It is a foundation of my ability to travel around the world and do these [talks].
I am already using it as my preferred currency for the vast majority of my expenses. I do that voluntarily and no one has to follow me. They have to follow me only through the persuasion of my arguments and ideas. It is an open market, a voluntary system.
I think the idea of imposing that on a nationalist and border basis, or any aggregation of states, is fundamentally wrong. No country will choose to implement a digital currency unless that digital currency is a centralized, controlled, statist nightmare of surveillance -- in which case, you probably shouldn't use it. No country will "choose" to use bitcoin, because they don't have to. It is meaningless for a country to "choose" to use bitcoin, because a country is just its people.
If its people choose to use bitcoin, they will [use it] even if their government disagrees. If they don't [want to use it], they won't, even if their government wants them to. We are associating currencies with flags, nation-states, top-down authority, and the "respectability" or "credibility" that comes from a central issuer. Those are all notions that are completely antiquated in every way.
So, just choose!